If using the h.264 is there a much of a difference on quality, and storage space between MP4, vs MOV. Also is there much of a difference in sales between the two formats? Do buyers prefer one or the other for stock?
Same with h.264 vs photoJPG when using MOV. Is there much of a difference in sales between the two?



I'm running low on storage. With istock's requirement of everything be mov using photoJPG it just eats up my hard drive space. for keeping hard drive space usage minimal would it be okay to render the twice, once as photoJPG (for istock) and a second copy as h.264 then delete the photoJPG version after I upload it to istock.
If there is a need for the photoJPG version again just rerender it from the h.264 copy I have, or would this cause a loss in quality as it's a rerender from a different format and it would just be best to keep both formats? It's just hard to justify a 1.5gb clip and an additional 120mb clip for the same file.

Also how do you keyword video? I know with images and it's easy but video I'm not sure how to do so. Instead I've been uploading to every site then keywording there which leads to keywording the same video over and over for every site.

Then last question for now at least. Where are the sales with video? do okay on photo so far, but have no idea what to do or where to go with video.


Thank you.

Or just delete after upload as you say. The uploaded file will be a backup for you anyway.

I would not count on stock sites to be your backup plan. I iStock does not allow you to download your own files. I'm not sure about orther stock sites.

I believe pond5 lets you download them, and I do have code42 to backup my stuff but trying to get away from huge downloads in the need of backup. Would rather store local. I do need more hard drives anways as my pictures are also running out of space, but just can't afford it now. soon though as I believe I can get 2tb for about 60 bucks on amazon.

With that though would I take a massive hit in quality only keeping the h.264 format and make photoJPG from that if I need it again?

As far as ProRes 422, can you get that on windows? No apple product is in my near future.

H.264 is not ideal, because if the buyer wants to edit the video (say, color corrections) H.264 is often inferior to PhotoJPEG/ProRes.

I recently found a way to encode with the ProRes codec on Windows, using AfterCodecs you can encode a lossless video format into ProRes using AE.

Quote from: txking on June 10, 2017, 20:56

I believe pond5 lets you download them, and I do have code42 to backup my stuff but trying to get away from huge downloads in the need of backup. Would rather store local. I do need more hard drives anways as my pictures are also running out of space, but just can't afford it now. soon though as I believe I can get 2tb for about 60 bucks on amazon.

With that though would I take a massive hit in quality only keeping the h.264 format and make photoJPG from that if I need it again?

As far as ProRes 422, can you get that on windows? No apple product is in my near future.

H.264 is not ideal, because if the buyer wants to edit the video (say, color corrections) H.264 is often inferior to PhotoJPEG/ProRes.

I recently found a way to encode with the ProRes codec on Windows, using AfterCodecs you can encode a lossless video format into ProRes using AE.

Very interesting. I have been looking for a way to encode Prores on Windows. I might give AfterCodecs a try

Quote from: increasingdifficulty on June 12, 2017, 03:25

The only benefit of h.264 is size and download time.

Most editors want to edit ProRes or another less CPU intensive format anyway so they would convert.

Even with the most powerful machines, editing complex projects with 4k h.264 can be a nightmare... Throw in the same clips as ProRes and it's a breeze!

I have been thinking for a while about going ProRes on Windows.
I must admit that I hardly sell any 4k clips at all. I encode in JPEG at 23.976 fps (I am based in the UK), maybe I should also try 30 fps.
But when I check the best selling 4k files in P5 artist'a resource, I notice that only a very small percentage are in ProRes

Yes, of course subject matter always comes first. And who knows what some buyers are thinking...

Why someone would pay $499 for a mediocre and SHAKY clip of clouds is beyond my understanding... (this week's top sellers at P5).

Hmm, maybe it's actually best to shoot a shaky handheld clip of some ducks with clipped highlights, encode it as hard as I can with the worst codec and then set the price to $999... It might just work.